GOP proposes $1.3 trillion in savings over next 10 years

posted at 1:36 pm on May 25, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

Democratic attempts to paint Republicans as the Party of No got a little tougher today with the release of a new plan from the House Republicans on the Budget Committee.  The GOP has demanded spending cuts, and today the group led by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) laid out a preliminary slate of specifics.  If adopted, they predict that they can save over $1.3 trillion over the next ten years.  In the preamble, the GOP caucus slams the Democrats for failing to provide a budget for FY2011:

Having shoveled out trillions of dollars in new spending and debt, House Democratic leaders now admit they cannot budget for all of it – and won’t even try. For the first time, the House will fail even to propose a budget. Instead the Democratic Majority will resort to an ad hoc, spend-as-you-go process that abandons any pretense of governing.

The primary responsibility of any Congress is to develop a budget for the next fiscal year.  One hundred and ten Houses have managed to meet that responsibility, even when the chambers were narrowly divided along partisan lines, and when control between Capitol Hill and the White House was divided between Republicans and Democrats.  In this year, Democrats have an 18-seat majority in the Senate, more than a 70-seat majority in the House, and they control the White House.  What possible excuse could Democrats have for not producing a budget, other than incompetence or dishonesty?

In contrast, the Republicans list a number of spending proposals to close the budget gap, most of which has already been introduced to the House and ignored by Nancy Pelosi.  It counters the entire narrative of the Party of No, showing that Republicans have attempted to offer ideas to reduce spending and the national debt, or at least to slow down the growth in both.  Had Democrats decided to actually produce a budget, they would have had to consider the following:

  • Cancel Unused TARP Funds. Prohibit the Treasury Secretary from entering into new commitments under the Troubled Asset Relief Program [TARP]. Ending TARP would prevent up to $396 billion in additional disbursements; CBO estimates savings of $16 billion. H.R. 3140 introduced by Rep. Tom Price of Georgia.
  • Cancel Unspent ‘Stimulus’ Funds. Rescind all unobligated budget authority authorized under the “stimulus” bill and dedicate to deficit reduction. Saves up to $266 billion. H.R. 3140 introduced by Rep. Tom Price of Georgia.
  • Cut and Cap Discretionary Spending. Return non-defense discretionary spending to pre-Obama (fiscal year 2008) baseline levels. Saves up to $925 billion. Legislation introduced by Reps. Ryan and Hensarling (H.R. 3964) and Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio (H.R 3298) include caps on discretionary spending.
  • Reduce Government Employment. Hire one person for every two who leaves civilian government service until the workforce is reduced to pre-Obama levels (exempting the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, and Veterans Affairs). Saves an estimated $35 billion. H.R. 5348 introduced by Rep. Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming.
  • Freeze Government Pay. Freeze Federal civilian pay for 1 year. Saves an estimated $30 billion.
  • Adopt the Legislative Line-Item Veto. Enact a constitutional line-item veto law. The President’s FY 2011 budget included terminations, reductions, and savings that would achieve $23 billion in one year. While Congress may not accept all these savings, the Line Item Veto can help reduce spending. H.R. 1294 introduced by Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin.
  • Reform and Bring Transparency to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Reform these companies by ending conservatorship, shrinking their portfolios, establishing minimum capital standards, reducing conforming loan limits, and bringing transparency to taxpayer exposure. According to CBO, the cost to taxpayers of putting government in control of Fannie and Freddie is $373 billion through 2020. Saves an estimated $30 billion. H.R. 4889 introduced by Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas. H.R. 4653 introduced by Rep. Scott Garrett of New Jersey.
  • Create a Sunset Commission. Establish a commission to conduct systematic reviews of Federal programs and agencies, and make recommendations for those that should be terminated; and provide for automatic sunset of programs unless expressly reauthorized by the Congress. H.R. 393 introduced by Rep. Kevin Brady of Texas.

The biggest gain would come from rolling back non-defense discretionary spending to FY2008 levels, which would save $925 billion over ten years.  That, by the way, was the first of the Democratic Party budgets produced by Nancy Pelosi after taking the gavel in January 2007.  It might be better to go back to FY2000 or FY2001, before Republicans and Democrats combined to add hefty increases in nondefense discretionary spending, but FY2008 is at least an improvement — and a good start.

Fannie and Freddie reform might be the most stabilizing of the proposals.  Except for the unfunded mandates of Social Security and Medicare, Fannie/Freddie represent the greatest threat of potential future liabilities for the American taxpayer.  Instead of containing that damage, Congress allowed the Obama administration to uncap the Fannie/Freddie line of credit, making their bailouts bottomless.  Until we rid ourselves of that liability and force Fannie, Freddie, and the FHA to return to proper lending standards, we risk further collapses.

The Republicans have published their ideas on how to return to fiscal responsibility and accountability.  It may not be complete, but it’s better than anything seen from the Democrats, who seem intent on proving that they can’t even budget, let alone govern.

Republicans are also launching their America Speaking Out project, which will allow Americans to give feedback to their elected representatives about cutting spending and restoring fiscal responsibility.  I’ll talk with Rep. Michele Bachmann about that today on The Ed Morrissey Show, which starts at 3 pm ET!

Update: My point on budgets was really limited to the House, not Congress as a whole, although I don’t believe that we’ve had a Congress that has failed to produce a budget at all.  We’ve had plenty of them not produce a budget on time.  Thanks to Dustin at the Rightosphere for the clarification.

Update II: To Dustin’s point, the Republican Congress in 1999 failed to approve a final budget resolution, as noted by Ben Daniels on Twitter.  The House did, however, produce a budget that stalled in the Senate.  It’s still a good point to make, although it’s equally good to note that in 1999, a Republican Congress was dealing with a Democratic President.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Ho HO!

Inanemergencydial on May 25, 2010 at 1:38 PM

Just do it!!!!!!!!!

Dread Pirate Roberts VI on May 25, 2010 at 1:38 PM

Now the GOP needs to get out there and let the American people know about this! The media ain’t gonna do it for them.

Doughboy on May 25, 2010 at 1:38 PM

And it doesn’t even include ObamaCare repeal.

1. It should.

The GOP has demanded spending cuts, and today the group led by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) laid out a preliminary slate of specifics.

Who just Happened to vote for TARP and the GM bailout. Find someone else ladies…. that guy is not the brightest star in the sky!

upinak on May 25, 2010 at 1:39 PM

GOP, don’t back down on 0bamaCare.

Ward Cleaver on May 25, 2010 at 1:40 PM

Yahoo! I was beginning to think that the Republicans were just statues.

ORconservative on May 25, 2010 at 1:40 PM

Ryan is just the guy to be on TV every chance he gets to explain it.

That guy rocks.

BigWyo on May 25, 2010 at 1:41 PM

Hmm. Looks like some folks are reaching down between their legs and getting in touch with a man pair for once.

Now, let’s see them get out and swing a hammer like a Palin and I just might raise another eyebrow.

ted c on May 25, 2010 at 1:41 PM

How the he1l are the demorats supposed to buy votes and pay off the unions by cutting spending?

110 years of Congressional budgets, and now we’ve reached the point that they say “screw it, we’re just going to spend”. Good times.

Bishop on May 25, 2010 at 1:41 PM

GOP proposes $1.3 trillion in savings over next 10 years

Imagine what could be accomplished if we could trust the elected officials in the GOP?

Its staggering.

portlandon on May 25, 2010 at 1:42 PM

Ryan has been, by far, the most articulate and persuasive when it comes to critiquing of the Democrats overly-inflated and reckless spending. He is quickly becoming one of the front running stars of the party.

Roc on May 25, 2010 at 1:42 PM

That guy rocks.

BigWyo on May 25, 2010 at 1:41 PM

I would rather have Dr. Doom.

upinak on May 25, 2010 at 1:42 PM

well thats one year of an Obama Deficit, what about the rest?

jp on May 25, 2010 at 1:42 PM

What possible excuse could Democrats have for not producing a budget, other than incompetence or dishonesty?

Hey, it’s incompetence and dishonesty! The Fascist-Democrats give you two for the price of one.

rbj on May 25, 2010 at 1:43 PM

And it doesn’t even include ObamaCare repeal.

1. It should.

upinak on May 25, 2010 at 1:39 PM

+1,000,000,0000,0000,0000,000,000,000,000.

portlandon on May 25, 2010 at 1:43 PM

upinak, to your point, I don’t think we should hang on our hats on any of these guys until they come out as consistent, strong anti spend reps.
At this point I don’t trust any of them.

ORconservative on May 25, 2010 at 1:43 PM

Great start!

Now can they talk about repealling Obamacare?

petunia on May 25, 2010 at 1:44 PM

More of this.

They need to win Congress, though, and TRUMPET this stuff day in and out.

Good Lt on May 25, 2010 at 1:45 PM

Cut and Cap Discretionary Spending. Return non-defense discretionary spending to pre-Obama (fiscal year 2008) baseline levels.

Hey, how about 1990 levels instead.

Midas on May 25, 2010 at 1:46 PM

Cut Defense spending or this proposal is worthless.

Decider on May 25, 2010 at 1:46 PM

Create a Sunset Commission. Establish a commission to conduct systematic reviews of Federal programs and agencies, and make recommendations for those that should be terminated; and provide for automatic sunset of programs unless expressly reauthorized by the Congress. H.R. 393 introduced by Rep. Kevin Brady of Texas.

This. This would educate the American people about the absolute FAILURE of so many liberal programs.

At the same time it guarantees termination b/c Congress can’t legislate its way out of a paper bag and probably isn’t even aware of half of the programs in existence, let alone be “competent enough” to reauthorize them all.

Firefly_76 on May 25, 2010 at 1:48 PM

If you haven’t seen Drudge, take a look. Amazing page right now.

TheBigOldDog on May 25, 2010 at 1:50 PM

upinak, to your point, I don’t think we should hang on our hats on any of these guys until they come out as consistent, strong anti spend reps.
At this point I don’t trust any of them.

ORconservative on May 25, 2010 at 1:43 PM

You are correct. Why are we trusting any of these buttheads?

This guy sold us out and now we are suppose to listen to him. WTF evr! Until someone else comes out with something… I am and will remain leary of Ryan.

upinak on May 25, 2010 at 1:50 PM

Too little too late…the games over.

PatriotRider on May 25, 2010 at 1:51 PM

How dare those damned GOP’er’s commit treason by trying to undermine Messiah Obama’s social justice and redistribution of wealth programs…

doriangrey on May 25, 2010 at 1:52 PM

Cut Defense spending or this proposal is worthless.

Decider on May 25, 2010 at 1:46 PM

Why defense spending?!?
That’s the only legitimate, Constitutional spending they do!

Jenfidel on May 25, 2010 at 1:53 PM

Why stop at pre-Obama levels? We were still digging the hole then. How about pre-FDR levels for all departments?

Kelligan on May 25, 2010 at 1:53 PM

Cut Defense spending or this proposal is worthless.

Decider on May 25, 2010 at 1:46 PM

Where it can be cut, cut it. But providing a strong defense of this country is one of the primary functions of our government. And presently the government is failing on a large scale to do that with the funds it has at this time.

Presently we have something like 12 million illegal aliens in this country. It’s going to cost a huge amount of money to fix the problem one way or the other. Through deportations or amnesty. Both solutions have a huge price tag when looking at 12 million individuals.

We need to adjust the priorities in our military spending. Such as the military expenditures on flying Nancy Pelosi and her family all over the damn place. Total waste of military funds. Things like that can be cut or re-appropriated to an area that needs shoring up.

ButterflyDragon on May 25, 2010 at 1:54 PM

The “1%” plan is what the republicans should purpose. Cut EVERYTHING in the Government Budget 1% and lock it. This means EVERYTHING including Republican favorites like the Military. If we cut everything then nobody can complain about favorites. Also include a 1% tax Increase on EVERYONE. 1% cut in government spending and a 1% increase in taxes and LOCK IT. We say to the federal government you have $$$ to spend on social security. If thats not enough then your going to have to cut spending for certain people or raise the retirement age. Were not borrowing anymore money (printing).

brewcrew67 on May 25, 2010 at 1:54 PM

BREAKING NEWS…. Obama furiously searching for Violin…

doriangrey on May 25, 2010 at 1:54 PM

Hey, how about 1990 levels instead.

Midas on May 25, 2010 at 1:46 PM

That’s where they want our carbon output levels. Sounds like a good number for spending!

mwdiver on May 25, 2010 at 1:54 PM

And it doesn’t even include ObamaCare repeal.

Then it should be followed up by a proposal to repeal Obamacare, complete with price tag of money saved.

I know they can’t get Obamacare repealed before November, but they can attach a price tag in the form of possible savings.

tom on May 25, 2010 at 1:55 PM

Wow. And this doesn’t even touch any of the “third rail” programs like Medicare, Medicaid, or food stamps. Hard to imagine Democrats demagoguing this proposal as “cutting aid to the poor and middle class.”

Nice job, Republicans!

rockmom on May 25, 2010 at 1:56 PM

1.3 trillion over 10 years. Isn’t the deficit over the next 10 years like 10 trillion dollars?

lorien1973 on May 25, 2010 at 1:57 PM

Cut Defense spending or this proposal is worthless.

Decider on May 25, 2010 at 1:46 PM

You never pass up an opportunity to demonstrate your ignorance!

Inanemergencydial on May 25, 2010 at 1:57 PM

lorien1973 on May 25, 2010 at 1:57 PM

isn’t that all of obamacare?

upinak on May 25, 2010 at 1:57 PM

I like all of these ideas. Git’er done!

Darksean on May 25, 2010 at 1:58 PM

I know they can’t get Obamacare repealed before November, but they can attach a price tag in the form of possible savings.

tom on May 25, 2010 at 1:55 PM

They need to regain control of the House first, and then order a REAL scoring from CBO, with no gimmicks, no ten-years-of-taxes vs. six-years-of-costs, and no inclusion of revenues from the student loan takeover or the cuts in Medicare that nobody thinks will ever be enacted. When the true cost of that legislation is finally revealed to the public to be something closer to $2 trillion, Republicans will be able to repeal it and replace it with market-based reforms, easily.

rockmom on May 25, 2010 at 1:59 PM

$1.3 Trillion is about, oh, $10 Trillion to $15 Trillion short of what is needed over the next 10 years. Nice try Repubs. Keep cutting or lose your next election, as well…

Claudin on May 25, 2010 at 1:59 PM

$1.3 trillion over 10 years? That’s only a $130 billion per year. You could probably find that much in the couch cushions of one congressman. It’s a start, but if that’s it, then the GOP is perfectly willing to spend way more than Bush ever did.

rw on May 25, 2010 at 2:00 PM

what about the bush tax cuts?

reliapundit on May 25, 2010 at 2:00 PM

Funny how the cuts proposed by the Rs matches the cost-runs already incurred by ObamaCare.

From a certain perspective, the GOP just found a way to pay for ObamaCare.

BobMbx on May 25, 2010 at 2:00 PM

1.3 trillion over 10 years. Isn’t the deficit over the next 10 years like 10 trillion dollars?

lorien1973 on May 25, 2010 at 1:57 PM

Yes, but it sure makes the Dems’ crowing about their supposed $100 billion in savings from ObamaCare look stupid, doesn’t it?

rockmom on May 25, 2010 at 2:00 PM

im listening…

moonbatkiller on May 25, 2010 at 2:01 PM

BREAKING NEWS…. Obama furiously searching for Violin…

doriangrey on May 25, 2010 at 1:54 PM

People thought he was Neo, so they called him, “The One.” They didn’t realize it he was actually Nero, and he’d be watching Rome burn. They do now.

TheBigOldDog on May 25, 2010 at 2:01 PM

It DOES include a 30% cut in medicare payments to doctors over the next three years that would crash the entire health care system. They are the party of Steele Grahamnisty and mccain and until that changes they can’t be trusted

Redglen on May 25, 2010 at 2:01 PM

Also include a 1% tax Increase on EVERYONE. 1% cut in government spending and a 1% increase in taxes and LOCK IT. We say to the federal government you have $$$ to spend on social security. If thats not enough then your going to have to cut spending for certain people or raise the retirement age. Were not borrowing anymore money (printing).

brewcrew67 on May 25, 2010 at 1:54 PM

You’ll never starve the beast by giving it more…

tom on May 25, 2010 at 2:01 PM

And it doesn’t even include ObamaCare repeal

This idea, that republicans have even the smallest thought about not repealing 0bamacare at the first opportunity, must be ruthlessly nipped in the bud.

Rebar on May 25, 2010 at 2:02 PM

You I never pass up an opportunity to demonstrate your ignorance!

Inanemergencydial on May 25, 2010 at 1:57 PM

Little tip for you: “cut defense spending” =/= “slash the military budget to almost nothing”. This isn’t the Huffing-Paint-Post, for crying out loud. ButterflyDragon made a good point on just this.

Dark-Star on May 25, 2010 at 2:02 PM

It’s missing defunding NEA, NPR, PBS and ACORN-like organizations.

bw222 on May 25, 2010 at 2:04 PM

Little tip for you: “cut defense spending” =/= “slash the military budget to almost nothing”. This isn’t the Huffing-Paint-Post, for crying out loud. ButterflyDragon made a good point on just this.

Dark-Star on May 25, 2010 at 2:02 PM

Hey Nostradamus, Can you copy/paste my quote where I suggested what you insinuate?

I’ll wait.

Inanemergencydial on May 25, 2010 at 2:04 PM

I’m going with dishonesty, I don’t think it will matter to the dems and the media what the GOP says….they will come up with somethng other than the party of ‘no’ like party of racist or stingy.

tinkerthinker on May 25, 2010 at 2:06 PM

Give Sarah a chain saw and let her do the cutting. She reduced the Alaska state budget by 9%.

bw222 on May 25, 2010 at 2:06 PM

This Paul Ryan fellow is a smart man.

Terrye on May 25, 2010 at 2:07 PM

Five bucks says they pass the Line Item Veto and then repeal it just before or shortly after the next Republican becomes president.

Kafir on May 25, 2010 at 2:08 PM

I’d like to be optimistic about these ideas, because they’re great ideas. But who do they think is going to listen to them, much less make them happen. Can we follow through and get these things done or is Washington like the hopeless hole in the bottom of the Gulf?

scalleywag on May 25, 2010 at 2:09 PM

It’s missing defunding NEA, NPR, PBS and ACORN-like organizations.

bw222 on May 25, 2010 at 2:04 PM

I think that is what the Sunset Commission is about.

Terrye on May 25, 2010 at 2:10 PM

anyone listening to Walter Williams filling in for Rush right now….?

whoa.

ted c on May 25, 2010 at 2:10 PM

((Ryan/Christie) || (Christie/Ryan) 2012)

Sharke on May 25, 2010 at 2:11 PM

I’d like to be optimistic about these ideas, because they’re great ideas. But who do they think is going to listen to them, much less make them happen. Can we follow through and get these things done or is Washington like the hopeless hole in the bottom of the Gulf?

scalleywag on May 25, 2010 at 2:09 PM

I don’t know, but I think that young men like Paul Ryan would give it a try if they had the opportunity. But that means that they need support.

Terrye on May 25, 2010 at 2:11 PM

Ryan is just the guy to be on TV every chance he gets to explain it.

That guy rocks.

BigWyo on May 25, 2010 at 1:41 PM

+100

jake-the-goose on May 25, 2010 at 2:12 PM

Ryan is just the guy to be on TV every chance he gets to explain it.

That guy rocks.

BigWyo on May 25, 2010 at 1:41 PM

This is one thing I really like about Paul Ryan. He can go on TV and you do not have to be afraid of what he will say. You don’t explain what he meant to people, or defend him, or say he did not mean that way, or try to fight the Civil War again or any of that. He is smart enough to handle himself well with the media and the opposition.

Terrye on May 25, 2010 at 2:16 PM

It DOES include a 30% cut in medicare payments to doctors over the next three years that would crash the entire health care system. They are the party of Steele Grahamnisty and mccain and until that changes they can’t be trusted

Redglen on May 25, 2010 at 2:01 PM

If it does include any cuts to Medicare, it will never happen. Everyone in Congress is deathly afraid of getting re-elected this year and if you put that on the table, all bets are off.

Johnnyreb on May 25, 2010 at 2:21 PM

I am more then shocked at the lack of people who obviously don’t research people.

Actually… I am not. Shhhheeeeeeppplllleeeeee!

upinak on May 25, 2010 at 2:23 PM

The biggest gain would come from rolling back non-defense discretionary spending to FY2008 levels, which would save $925 billion over ten years.

Sorry to disagree, but the biggest gains will come from the economic growth that will accrue when more capital is made available to business instead of being sucked up to pay for stupid programs and to service the ballooning debt! The entire problem with DC economics is that always assume that their actions will have no impact on the economy. They use a simple (and terribly wrong) static model which just looks at the revenues and expenditures of the government without taking in to account how people and businesses respond to the climate they create.

MJBrutus on May 25, 2010 at 2:24 PM

These are great ideas. This should be part of a new Contract With America for all Republican House challengers.

It may be too early to consider Paul Ryan for President, but how about Speaker of the House, if the GOP takes 40+ seats in 2010?

Steve Z on May 25, 2010 at 2:25 PM

YES WE CAN…cut spending!

Steve Z on May 25, 2010 at 2:26 PM

Ryan is just the guy to be on TV every chance he gets to explain it.

That guy rocks.

BigWyo on May 25, 2010 at 1:41 PM

Without a doubt, he is our best friend on The Hill. I am completely PO’ed that the Republicans have not placed their full support behind this man! If the party had an ounce of sense, they would back him and his plans to the hilt.

MJBrutus on May 25, 2010 at 2:27 PM

They can’t/won’t produce a budget because they can’t/won’t install the mechanism of choice for PAYING for that budget, and that’s tax increases up the wazoooo! Libtards won’t do that five months from the mid-terms. They’re in deep enough doo-doo now.

GoldenEagle4444 on May 25, 2010 at 2:27 PM

Well this shouldn’t dampen efforts to repeal the health care bill! axe that too! $1.3 should be just the start. there is an enormous amount of waste, fraud, and abuse in washington.

golfballs03 on May 25, 2010 at 2:27 PM

And it doesn’t even include ObamaCare repeal.

Of course not. The unprincipled, uninspired GOP mopes will never repeal it. After all, 77% of the Political Class can’t be all Democrats.

The Political Class continues to be a strong supporter of the plan, however. While 67% of Mainstream voters believe the plan will be bad for America, 77% of the Political Class disagree and think it be good for the country.

Rae on May 25, 2010 at 2:27 PM

Fantastic. I have been waiting for this and it’s great. I think as time goes by we will see that it is not enough but I’m 100% behind this for now.

It’s important that as the Republicans discuss this they remind people why they are cutting this spending: The root cause of our economic problems is a lack of confidence in our ability to pay our debts. You don’t restore confidence by borrowing more, you restore the economy by electing conservatives and spending less.

motionview on May 25, 2010 at 2:28 PM

Who needs a budget when you can just print money?

/sarc

Dick Turpin on May 25, 2010 at 2:30 PM

How about we do something smart and simple … Don’t raise the debt ceiling one more penny.

tarpon on May 25, 2010 at 2:32 PM

Unfortunately, 1.3 trillon in savings wouldn’t even cover this year’s deficit.

tommyboy on May 25, 2010 at 2:34 PM

Ryan’s a pretty good guy, but this doesn’t mean squat. The GOP will not cut spending. Ever.

Bugler on May 25, 2010 at 2:35 PM

To get savings above this by an order of magnitude, to 10 or 15 Trillion over 10 years, you have to cut entitlement spending.

motionview on May 25, 2010 at 2:36 PM

It DOES include a 30% cut in medicare payments to doctors over the next three years that would crash the entire health care system. They are the party of Steele Grahamnisty and mccain and until that changes they can’t be trusted

Redglen on May 25, 2010 at 2:01 PM

If it does include any cuts to Medicare, it will never happen. Everyone in Congress is deathly afraid of getting re-elected this year and if you put that on the table, all bets are off.

Johnnyreb on May 25, 2010 at 2:21 PM

Back in the late 90s Congress balanced the budget partly by making cuts in Medicare, it has happened. In fact McCain did not even support expansion of Part D.

Terrye on May 25, 2010 at 2:37 PM

That’s where they want our carbon output levels. Sounds like a good number for spending!

mwdiver on May 25, 2010 at 1:54 PM

It’s more like 1890 levels for carbon emissions. Come to think of it that would work also for spending.

chemman on May 25, 2010 at 2:40 PM

And it doesn’t even include ObamaCare repeal.

Of course not. The unprincipled, uninspired GOP mopes will never repeal it. After all, 77% of the Political Class can’t be all Democrats.

The Political Class continues to be a strong supporter of the plan, however. While 67% of Mainstream voters believe the plan will be bad for America, 77% of the Political Class disagree and think it be good for the country.

Rae on May 25, 2010 at 2:27 PM

You know what Rae? As far as I am concerned the constant GOP bashing is just another boon to Democrats. As for being uninspired, what about the people who voted for the Democrats who voted for Obamacare and what about the people who sat on their behinds and refused to vote at all?

Terrye on May 25, 2010 at 2:40 PM

I’ll wait.

Inanemergencydial on May 25, 2010 at 2:04 PM

What are you waiting for?

Inanemergencydial on May 25, 2010 at 2:45 PM

Party of NO Budget.

NickelAndDime on May 25, 2010 at 2:46 PM

I’d still like to hear a justification for the unbridled spending, bottomless liabilities, etc., that this Amin/Congress has authorized and canonized.

Hint: there is no possible fiscal justification. It’s just the Cloward-Priven strategy of ushering in socialism by deliberately destroying our economy with government spending!

Obama, Pelosi, Dodd, Frank, et al, should all be tried for treason!

stonemeister on May 25, 2010 at 2:51 PM

Party of no!

ericire12 on May 25, 2010 at 2:58 PM

So the other $10 trillion of the deficit is OK?

What is wrong with these people?

faraway on May 25, 2010 at 3:01 PM

You know what Rae? As far as I am concerned the constant GOP bashing is just another boon to Democrats. As for being uninspired, what about the people who voted for the Democrats who voted for Obamacare and what about the people who sat on their behinds and refused to vote at all?

Terrye on May 25, 2010 at 2:40 PM

You know what, Terrye? The Bush GOP had the majority for 6 years and rather than head this monster off at the pass, they expanded Medicare, further federalized the education indoctrination system, launched one Keynesian stimuli after another, shredded the Bill of Rights in the name of “safety”, and waged costly progressive nation-building wars instead.

It has often been said that we can survive Obama, but we can’t survive his voters. How can we expect to change hearts and minds, or get conservatives to vote for the GOP, when the Republicans are not an opposition party? They no longer “stand athwart history, yelling Stop!” but are perfectly content yelling “Slower!”

Rae on May 25, 2010 at 3:03 PM

They keep trying to get a line-item veto, but didn’t the Supreme Court strike it down during Clinton’s regime?

John the Libertarian on May 25, 2010 at 3:06 PM

Repeal ObamaCare…!

d1carter on May 25, 2010 at 3:19 PM

Instead of a line item veto, formalize Impoundment and make it an enumerated power of the executive.

By formalize, I mean that the President sends Congress a list of funds being impounded, and Congress can override each individual item on the same terms as a presidential veto, i.e., two-thirds majority in both houses.

LarryD on May 25, 2010 at 3:21 PM

More ideas…

Cancel funding for NPR, PBS, National Endowment for Arts and Humanities

Cancel funding for Planned Parenthood, ACORN

Eliminate Departments of Education and Energy.

Cancel subsidies for green energy (wind, solar, ethanol etc) and electric/hybrid cars

Phase out ALL agricultural subsidies over 4 years (25% per year)

Repeal ObamaCare

txdoc on May 25, 2010 at 3:28 PM

<blockquoteAnd it doesn’t even include ObamaCare repeal.
Then it should be followed up by a proposal to repeal Obamacare, complete with price tag of money saved.

I know they can’t get Obamacare repealed before November, but they can attach a price tag in the form of possible savings.

tom on May 25, 2010 at 1:55 PM

My thoughts exactly.

Don’t be too hard on Paul Ryan, upinak. I do believe that he is knowledgeable in the area of economics AND has learned his lesson. Ryan certainly stopped ObaMao in his PR tracks when he overwhelmed the ManChild with facts at the O-care summit.
>

onlineanalyst on May 25, 2010 at 3:28 PM

More of this.

They need to win Congress, though, and TRUMPET this stuff day in and out.

Good Lt on May 25, 2010 at 1:45 PM

And the trumpeting should start NOW. Those who have introduced cost-cutting and limits-on-spending legislation should get out in front of the cameras, on talk-radio and Sunday talking-head programs early and often. They should stay on message and hammer the savings and other advantages of their legislation while also criticizing the waste and redundancies that currently exist.

onlineanalyst on May 25, 2010 at 3:33 PM

Looks great on paper.

rjl1999 on May 25, 2010 at 3:38 PM

To get savings above this by an order of magnitude, to 10 or 15 Trillion over 10 years, you have to cut entitlement spending.

motionview on May 25, 2010 at 2:36 PM

Ryan also had proposals for tackling Social Security. Unfortunately for his good ideas, too many Republicans are keeping Ryan at arm’s length.

onlineanalyst on May 25, 2010 at 3:45 PM

I am more then shocked at the lack of people who obviously don’t research people.

Actually… I am not. Shhhheeeeeeppplllleeeeee!

upinak on May 25, 2010 at 2:23 PM

I will admit I have had limited exposure to Mr. Ryan. The few times I have heard him, particularly when he ripped Obama’s tit$ off during the Health Care Theater Summit, he sounds like he knows what the hell he’ talking about. Plus he’s seems to have a knack for boiling things and cutting through the BS.

He voted for TARP and GM?? Ok. But now he seems to want to $hit can the whole lot. At least what hasn’t been flushed down the crapper already.

BigWyo on May 25, 2010 at 3:47 PM

“Freeze Government Pay. Freeze Federal civilian pay for 1 year. Saves an estimated $30 billion.”

..ouch! That’s gonna leave a mark!

The War Planner on May 25, 2010 at 4:32 PM

1.3 trillion over 10 years. Isn’t the deficit over the next 10 years like 10 trillion dollars?

lorien1973 on May 25, 2010 at 1:57 PM

I agree.

What we really need is 1.3 trillion over the next 12 months.

Chaz706 on May 25, 2010 at 5:53 PM

Technically, did the 110th Congress pass a budget? They passed continuing resolutions until after Obama was inaugurated, and then passed all of the appropriations bills for him to sign. It was their way of thumbing their nose (yet again) at Bush at the end of his term.

But the budget that was finally passed for 2009 was done by the current Congress, not by the 07/08 Congress. Am I missing something here? Yeah, there’s a difference between that and the point you are making, Ed, as there was at least a budgetary proposal put forth. But the lack of discipline and accountability was on full display even back then. I think the current lack of even a proposal is simply a logical extension of the Democrats’ fundamentally corrupt political philosophy.

nukemhill on May 25, 2010 at 6:08 PM

This is nice to see in theory, but REALITY is that we need to cut 1.3 trillion from the budget NEXT YEAR!

Somehow, the people that are nibbling around the edges of this insane spending are called out as radical.

The truth of the extent of budget cuts REQUIRED to balance this mess, and pay down the debt, are not even being discussed. Not yet anyway!

Freddy on May 25, 2010 at 6:18 PM

Comment pages: 1 2